stexpandedfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:USS Defiant (NCC-75633)
Terradome :In 2409, the Defiant led the assault on the Undine Terradome alongside with the USS Hood (NCC-50445). ( '' mission: )'' This needs a fan series/story reference to go with it. Otherwise, it should be posted to the --Hawku (talk) 01:15, July 29, 2014 (UTC) From Talk:USS São Paulo :The following discussions originated from the talk page for the once-separate page for the USS ''São Paulo.'' Merge Noticed they merged the articles on MA and I agree with their reasoning. Anyone against such a move? – 03:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC) :Only thing I can think of is, it's conceivable some fan continuities may have used/will use the name São Paulo, rather than Defiant... say in an alternate universe/alternate timeline. But they could still be merged until then. Another São Paulo page can be created later if that comes up. No opposition here. In fact, how about we vote on it... gives everyone time to weigh in. (See below.) 23:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Merge vote Vote closes 23:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC) ;Support # 23:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC) #usscantabrian 00:07, 23 February 2008 (UTC) # 01:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC) ;Oppose ;Comments *(See above.) 23:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC) *I agree. I think I brought this up somewhere on STEU too. --usscantabrian 00:07, 23 February 2008 (UTC) Vote closed - article to be merged. – 02:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC) Same ship Should this be combined with USS São Paulo (NCC-75633)? It is the same ship after all.– Cpthunt 16:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC) No canon data Hi all, there is no canon data to support the second Defiant having this registry number. They are talking about it at . Should this and the USS Sao Paolo (NCC-75633) article be merged? Or should both articles be merged into the USS Defiant (NX-74205) article since, technically, the second Defiant had the same registry eventually as the first? I'm confusing myself now... --usscantabrian 04:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC) :I'd prefer not to merge the articles. And since the registry number seen in WYLB was the same as the original, I'd suggest this page be moved to USS Defiant (NX-74205) (II). --TimPendragon 05:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC) ::Okay, agreed. I guess it could say something early in the article about it being the USS Sao Paolo prior to being the Defiant, right? My brain isn't working so well tonight lol. --usscantabrian 05:50, 23 December 2007 (UTC) On Memory Beta it's Uss Defiant NX-74205 not Uss Defiant Ncc-75633.Sisko received special dispensation from Starfleet Operations to rename the São Paulo to USS Defiant and to alter the registry to NX-74205 in honor of the fallen USS Defiant, which was lost at the Second Battle of Chin'toka.Change it to Uss Defiant NX-74205.Star Trek Deep Space Nine episode The Dogs of War.Go to a site called television drama scripts-star trek minutiae,read the episode script The Dogs of War.I am right.User Typhuss Nerys :Welcome, Typhuss! It's nice to see you willing to back up your edits. As for my opinion, This ship is a very unique case (at least in Television Trek history), where the same hull was known under different registries. In my opinion, since this is a different ship hull, we should treat it as a different ship, as it is currently done here. --Talon Lardner 18:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC) :::The "special dispensation" was to rename the ship, no mention of changing the registry was made in . In the footage of the final battles in , the Defiant was shown to have the original NX-74205 registry, but that's simply because the SFX team used the original CGI model for budgetary reasons. There's no real proof that Starfleet changed the registry as well as the name. Regardless of honoring the original Defiant, this one is a different vessel. As for Memory Beta, the debate raged there for a while, too. Where they came down is their own business, and has no sway here. --TimPendragon 20:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC) ::::Now, all that being said... I wouldn't be opposed to going back to the "USS Defiant (NX-74205) (I)" and "USS Defiant (NX-74205) (II)" designators if that's the consensus on the wiki, especially if there's written fan fiction out there that explicitly uses the original ship's registry for the renamed vessel. --TimPendragon 20:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC) Anymore thoughts on this, gang? --TimPendragon 04:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC) Sounds fine to me– Cpthunt 05:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)